McVity v. Tranouth

McVity v. Tranouth

Majority held that the legal title was treated as vested in the solicitor from the time of the conveyance to him so that the Statute of Limitations began to run from that time; the subsequent registration of the mortgage gave the mortgagees priority over the unregistered re-conveyance and the defendants' right to bring the action was barred by limitation, thus appeal dismissed.

Citation
(1905) 36 SCR 455
Parties
Appellants / Plaintiffs: George H.G. McVity and Others; Respondents / Defendants: Rachel Tranouth and William Tranouth
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 June 1905
Procedural Posture
Action for Possession and Sale (mortgage Enforcement/redemption) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed.
Legal Topics
Statute of Limitations, Priority of Registered Vs Unregistered Deeds, Possession and Right of Entry, Effect of Registry Statutes on Title
Source Language
English
Property Law Real Property Registry Mortgages Limitation of Actions Fraud Equity Statute of Limitations Priority of Registered Vs Unregistered Deeds +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George H.G. McVity and Others

Appellants / Plaintiffs

Rachel Tranouth and William Tranouth

Respondents / Defendants

Procedural Posture

Action for Possession and Sale (mortgage Enforcement/redemption) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When does the Statute of Limitations begin to run where an unregistered prior deed and a subsequent registered mortgage exist and the prior conveyance was procured by fraud?
  2. 2 Does the Registry Act render an unregistered prior conveyance void ab initio as against a subsequent registered mortgagee, thereby allowing limitation to run against the prior grantee in possession?
  3. 3 Whether the mortgagee obtained a good title and right of entry despite the prior unregistered conveyance to third parties.

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held that the legal title was treated as vested in the solicitor from the time of the conveyance to him so that the Statute of Limitations began to run from that time; the subsequent registration of the mortgage gave the mortgagees priority over the unregistered re-conveyance and the defendants' right to bring the action was barred by limitation, thus appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed.